The Jackass blinks!

From The Washington Post:

President Bush and congressional leaders began negotiating a second war funding bill yesterday, with Democrats offering the first major concession: an agreement to drop their demand for a timeline to bring troops home from Iraq.

Democrats backed off after the House failed, on a vote of 222 to 203, to override the president's veto of a $124 billion measure that would have required U.S. forces to begin withdrawing as early as July. But party leaders made it clear that the next bill will have to include language that influences war policy. Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.) outlined a second measure that would step up Iraqi accountability, "transition" the U.S. military role and show "a reasonable way to end this war."

To be perfectly honest I did not think that the Democrats would go this far. They have so aligned themselves with the idea that the war in Iraq is already lost, could never have been won in the first place, and was a tragic mistake made by an incompetent president that a victory in Iraq would seriously jeopardize, if not utterly destroy, their chances of winning the White House and retaining control of the legislature in 2008.

The only thing which could have brought them to this position is polling results which convince them that Mr. Bush has won the propaganda war over the pullout timeline language in the vetoed legislation. Despite the years long anti-war propaganda efforts of the left's house organs - otherwise known as the mainstream media - the American people are not willing to sign an instrument of unconditional surrender and abandon their troops in the field.

I am firmly convinced that the polls which show the public's support for the war and disapproval of the president are reflecting unhappiness at the fact that a winnable war has not been won and dissatisfaction with what they perceive as poor leadership in that war effort. If General Petraeus' new strategy is able to bring about significant progress the public's perception of the war and the president will turn on a dime.

The Democrat leadership knows this and so cannot afford to allow the United States to achieve any kind of outcome in Iraq which could plausibly cast as a victory:

"We made our position clear. He made his position clear. Now it is time for us to try to work together," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) said after a White House meeting. "But make no mistake: Democrats are committed to ending this war."

As I said, they have to be dedicated to ending the war at this point. They have painted themselves into such a corner with their opposition that there is no possible way which they can share in any credit for any kind of victory.

Well, there is one thing they can do. If they can force some kind - any kind - of policy change on the president then if they are ultimately unsuccessful in sabotaging the war effort and we do manage to win then they can say that victory only came because of their intervention. I believe that we can see this bet hedging in the likely compromise which will emerge from negotiations between Congress and the White House:

House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (Md.) indicated that the next bill will include benchmarks for Iraq -- such as passing a law to share oil revenue, quelling religious violence and disarming sectarian militias -- to keep its government on course. Failure to meet benchmarks could cost Baghdad billions of dollars in nonmilitary aid, and the administration would be required to report to Congress every 30 days on the military and political situation in Iraq.

Benchmarks have emerged as the most likely foundation for bipartisan consensus and were part of yesterday's White House meeting, participants said. "I believe the president is open to a discussion on benchmarks," said Senate Democratic Whip Richard J. Durbin (Ill.), who attended the session. He added that no terms were discussed. "We didn't go into any kind of detail," Durbin said.

Benchmarks would be the perfect face-saving measure for Congress to adopt. They allow them to tell the moonbat anti-war wing of their party that they forced "real and meaningful" change on the president's war policy without depriving the troops of needed funding or setting a surrender deadline (which would be anathema to the majority of the American public which retains its sanity).

There is even the outside chance that the benchmarks could light a fire under the Iraqi government and generate some progress on their end of the job. And this will certainly be a disappointment to the Democrat Party's allies in Iraq (otherwise known as al-Qaeda in Iraq). Without the prospect of imminent US surrender the will to continue a struggle which they cannot win without US congressional intervention on their behalf will be that much harder to maintain.

This is why people who want to see America win its war against Islamofascism need to on their guard. Democrats know that their best chance at victory in 2008 is still a US defeat. While they may be willing to reach an accommodation with the president which still leaves America with a realistic chance of victory now they will be unlikely to let that condition stand.

This is why I expect a major effort in the coming months to build a case that the benchmarks, whatever they wind up being, are not being met. Add to this outright efforts to sabotage Iraqi efforts to meet those benchmarks and you have the Democrats' next strategy in their long twilight struggle to destroy Western civilization.